I always get an uneasy feeling about this case whenever its mentioned. why?, because the more you look into it the more nothing fits,and the saying "if it does not gel then its not aspic" We are all by now [thanks to the media coverage] well aware of the location and terrible circumstances and of this murder. However Ms Lees version of these events of course requires no verification as she was the only witness.If you discount the "conclusive" DNA evidence from an "Expert"[this particular DNA technique by the way has already been challenged ]all you are left with is circumstantial evidence with no body,and Joanne lees version of events.This of course is always cause for concern.DNA is not the holy grail and as a man made science is not infallible.The Aborigine trackers that the police used had been tracking in the outback for generations, and they could find no evidence whatsoever of the dog and man that apparently [in all Joanna Lees statements] were looking for her,while she hid in the scrub.This is just one of many inconsistencies in her testimony.Strange how the alleged killer just drove away and left her alive as a prime witness,to practically guarantee his eventual capture?..As i say little of her testimony holds water, and of course there will always be those that say Miss Lees was in trauma,and the accounts are therefore muddled due to her then, state of mind,and although i accept this may have been a possibility,she seems to have now fully regained her mental abilities, regarding finance at least, making more than £250,000 from the book and at least £60,000 in uk television interviews since returning home.but i have a sneaking suspicion that we have not heard the last from
her. I am not suggesting Miss Lees was responsible or complicit in this crime but merely to suggest,There is a lot more to tell here than we have already heard,and i am sure we will hear it eventually, because as we all know, time reveals all.